I wouldn't support my 16 year old son doing either. I wouldn't finance it, do drop offs or pick ups, or in any way be involved. I'd be suggesting another sport altogether.

While I don't think target shooting makes somebody a violent person, I have an issue with guns.

No child ever accidentally beat themselves to death after stumbling on a parents' improperly stored boxing glove. Nobody ever walked into a movie theatre and boxed 16 people to death. I know there are ways around both of the above, but I simply wouldn't be a party to an activity where a gun is a recreational item despite not seeing an actual connection between that specific activity and violence.

Boxing, hands down. I believe boxers are regarded as lethal weapons, aren't they? It is not their gloves but their hands - don't they have to register them or something? They can kill you with one punch.

Target shooting is the least violent as one would be shooting.....a target. I think target shooting would be like archery or to some extent golf, good for coordination and concentration and calculating distances etc. I have no interest in it though, if DS showed an interest I wouldnt discourage him but I would make sure he knows about gun safety, not to shoot people or animals etc.

Yes, boxing is violent. But it's also a real skill that may conceivably protect them in real life, someday. But that's kind of a by-the-by.The main reason is that boxing does not separate a person from the violence. It's in their face (literally). They know how being hit feels, they know the damage it does, they don't take it lightly. They are very much a part of what is happening, and not shielded from the outcomes.Additionally, due to the physical exertion, I imagine it could help a person work off aggression.

Guns, and anything that associates with them, leave me cold. Guns allow a person to kill other people (or animals) en masse, with almost no personal involvement or physiological feedback. They separate the shooter from the extreme violence and force of the act they are committing, because they themselves do not have to come close to, or feel the struggle of, the person they are killing. Sure, target shooting is shooting at a target, not a person. But guns were not invented for shooting at targets. So while the hobby is kind of 'once removed', it's still associated, for me. And it's not a skill they are likely to use in real life - or if they are - that's not a good thing.Sevenyears summarised how I feel about guns

QUOTE (Sevenyears @ 18/12/2012, 11:19 AM)

No child ever accidentally beat themselves to death after stumbling on a parents' improperly stored boxing glove. Nobody ever walked into a movie theatre and boxed 16 people to death. I know there are ways around both of the above, but I simply wouldn't be a party to an activity where a gun is a recreational item despite not seeing an actual connection between that specific activity and violence.

Skill-wise, I feel that boxing is much more of a skill. It involves psychology and anticipating the other person's movements and interpreting their body language and understanding the human body and where it is vulnerable. It involves a moving target and defense. I think this probably generalises to a number of sports played against opponents whether individual or as part of a team. I think it also generalises to personal safety. Shooting is learning to operate a specific piece of equipment very accurately. I think it generalises to... I dunno, shooting other stuff I guess.

In reality, I hope my child will do martial arts or something more defense based than attack based like boxing. I'd rather they picked up the useful skills from there without actually having to hit another person, or get hit. But if they wanted to do shooting, I'd let them, but I wouldn't be happy about it. I hate guns.

I don't think it's hypocritical to box and be against guns. Mass murders have never been carried out by boxing.

I agree with most of what you said CallMaAliG. My kids don't play with guns, don't watch any shows with violence in them. I am the strictest parent I know in regards to toy guns/weapons etc. I would just like to say though that for us, as a farming family, target shooting is a real life, applicable skill. Foxes are a feral pest and they will decimate a chicken flock or newborn lambs if given half a chance, not to mention native animals. They need to be eradicated and I don't know any other way of doing it as cheaply, quickly and accurately (assuming a skilled shooter here)

As an archer myself it is a sport of physical strength, calculations, environmental allowances, co-ordination and self control. It requires discipline and patience.

My husband on the other hand was a boxer. It still requires stamina and the physical/mental abilities as with most sports but the key factor is requires the person to have a want to participate and actively hit another person. They want to knock them out.

I'm glad my husband came to his senses and gave it. Sometimes he regrets his decision as he was quite good but then as he described he didn't want to be a 'meathead' or 'punchdrunk' for the rest of his life.

DH has already stated he does not want our son to take up boxing.

In regards to weapons shooting or archery (for me) require weapons to be secured and security/random checks by police to ensure regulations are followed. Boxers on the other are not regulated. They are their weapon. Should a situation arise a boxer can kill with one punch.

CallMeAliG - Although I don't agree with everything you have said I do like you opinions.

Unfortunately people who have trained as boxers have used their skills in the past to kill or hurt others however as proven with the current boxing program for Aboriginal youths boxing more often reduces criminal behaviours.

I am not against boxing but out of all the target shooters I know (quite a few) and boxers I know (also quite a few) I don't know any shooters that have injured themselves shooting worse then catching some skin in the magazine. Boxers on the other hand... lets just say apparently separating your bicep from the bone is very painful.

I am very pro gun control and Australia's system works however it p*sses me off when people confuse Australian shooters with the NRA. I also have a family member (by marriage thank god) who is in the NRA and some of the things that come out of his mouth shock me. He is however a good law abiding Christian

I wouldn't support my 16 year old son doing either. I wouldn't finance it, do drop offs or pick ups, or in any way be involved. I'd be suggesting another sport altogether.

While I don't think target shooting makes somebody a violent person, I have an issue with guns.

No child ever accidentally beat themselves to death after stumbling on a parents' improperly stored boxing glove. Nobody ever walked into a movie theatre and boxed 16 people to death. I know there are ways around both of the above, but I simply wouldn't be a party to an activity where a gun is a recreational item despite not seeing an actual connection between that specific activity and violence.

I am a licensed firearms holder (target shooting mainly, but also my dad has farms and it is required for feral animals and pests). I don't enter competitions as such, just mainly something that DF and I can do together and have friendly battles. DF does enter comps.

We enjoy it. We certainly are over the top careful about safety and storage. There are many many laws in Australia about gun ownership and licensing.

I am not a fan of boxing, its always violent. To be a boxer is to be violet (albeit in a controlled environment).

For a shooter (target or farm) it is not. The vast majority of firearms owners and responsible and do not commit any type of gun crime.

It is only when weapons get into the wrong hands (either by being stolen or not secured) or people with mental issues have them available to them that these horrific events occur.

I think Autralias gun laws are reasonably strict, and rightly so. Although I wouldn't oppose some type of a psychiatric test to either gain a license or random type thing to keep a license current.

I don't believe the US will ever be able to control guns. I really really hope they try, but I can't see it happening.

There is absolutely no reason that civilians need semi-automatic weapons to fire at a range. There may be a minute percentage of people that may need them for farming but not the general public.

Whoops... may have gone a bit off topic... but yeah, boxing more violent in my opinion

I think boxing is more violent. I'd do everything I could to dissuade my children from boxing as a sport.

QUOTE

No child ever accidentally beat themselves to death after stumbling on a parents' improperly stored boxing glove.

There are very strict rules regarding the safe storage of guns. Even if a child could break into a gun safe, they wouldn't be able to discharge it because the bolt (I only know for rifles) and ammunition are stored securely elsewhere.

Boxing, no argument - obviously damage is inflicted on another human being (never mind the propensity for permanent brain damage), whereas shooting isn't a contact sport. I don't know how anyone could argue otherwise??

As for guns, I'm not in favour of individuals holding them in their possession for any reason - if they are to be used for sport they should be stored in a secure facility elsewhere than the home for use only at the sporting facility.